Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 10, 2011, 8:45 AM   #11
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

The 24-105 is a very good lens and it's my main wedding, portrait etc lens. Without knowing what you want to shoot I can't say if the 28-300 is going to do a good job or the 5DmkII for that fact.

Any lens with a vast range is going to be a compromise, even the L lens you mention. You are much better with a 24-70/105 and a 70-200mm f2.8 when it comes to quality.
__________________
Any problems with a post or thread please use the report button at the bottom left of the post and the team will help sort it out.

Have fun everyone!


See what I'm up to visit my Plymouth Wedding Photography
site or go to my blog.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 10, 2011, 2:44 PM   #12
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

The 28-300 is optically quite poor and HUGE.

There's nothing wrong with buying the best camera you can afford, but at the moment you seem to be all at sea.

What exactly is your current camera not doing for you that a more expensive camera is going to help with?

(p.s. if you think this stuff is expensive, you clearly didn't see the price of the M9 titanium, which was EUR 22,0000 with a fixed focal length 35mm lens.)

A 5D2 plus a couple of L zooms is going to set you back $5,000-$6,000, and that is just the start. You can easily spend $10,000 on lenses without even getting into the L telephotos. The same is true for all the FF systems, so unless you have lots of cash to spare you should think about it carefully.
__________________
My gallery
My X100 blog

Last edited by peripatetic; Jan 10, 2011 at 3:05 PM.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2011, 12:02 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Posts: 109
Default

Well I don't think that it will really matter what camera I get as far as the lenses go. All I want is a couple (two or three) of lenses that will give me a range from 15 to 25mm out to about 300 to 400mm. I would also like a prime lens at maybe 50mm. I don't want to go all crazy with the lenses.

Like I said before I enjoy photography everything. I would like a camera that can perform well in all categories from sports to nature to low light or macro. I have experimented in portrait photography but Im not that good at because I just can't make myself fork over the money for all the gear I need for lighting. Eventually maybe, but for now I like to go out to parks and take photos of landscapes and animals while Im out and then when I am at home and my wife doesn't want to go out I play around with macro. I bought some magnifier filters that give me some crazy shots close up. Like I took a picture of the lens cap of one of my SLR lenses and the light from the tv along with the affect of the filters produced a picture to where the letters on the cap were in focus but everything else had an amazing bokeh. But thats besides the point. I just don't want a camera that can only performs well in one area or two. With my K-x its annoying because the AF is extremely slow unless theirs an over abundance of light and when I compare images from my brother's Canon D40 (I think it was a D40) his out performs mine when I take the same exact images. Anyway, I love my K-x but I think its time to upgrade....
__________________
Pentax K-x
18-55
55-200
Photoshop CS5
Trihame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2011, 12:21 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

oh you will not find a good 15mm on a FF camera, 16-35mm L is pretty much the only option. The sigma 12-24 really was not design for FF camera and have major issues on the wide end. You are looking at a 1400 dollar lens in the canon. The kit lens 24-105L and the 100-400L would be a good setup for you focal range needs, but you are looking at 3000 dollars in add on lens plus the 5dii with the kit lens.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.

Last edited by shoturtle; Jan 11, 2011 at 12:30 AM.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2011, 12:28 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Posts: 109
Default

I was look at this, http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...t/1228/cat/all, and says that this camera will support all EF lenses except the EF-S lenses. So my question is will a normal lens like the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM not work with the camera? We said before that because of the cameras 35mm sensor needs more light, so I guess what Im asking is does that mean that the lens above is worthless with the 5D2?

Oh and I was thinking, another problem with the K-x is that I was thinking about getting a "limited" lens or two but sense I want to upgrade I don't think I want to invest in expensive lenses for that camera when it would be smarter to save the money for the upgraded camera's lenses.
__________________
Pentax K-x
18-55
55-200
Photoshop CS5
Trihame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2011, 12:37 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Posts: 109
Default

well the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM is MSLR at $1,799

(http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consum..._5_5_6l_is_usm),

I found it on amazon for $1,499

(http://www.amazon.com/Canon-100-400m...4727588&sr=8-1)

On a side note, how well yall personally think that the K-x would perform with the limited lenses? Do yall think the the K-x is worth keeping (as in not selling when upgrading) if you had limited lenses as well?

__________________
Pentax K-x
18-55
55-200
Photoshop CS5
Trihame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2011, 12:40 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

With the 5d2 which is a full frame camera it give you great dof control and captures a ton more details then an aps-c camera. So to take full advantage of the larger sensor, pro level glass is need. It will accept all EF lens, and the 28-135 which is my personal walk around lens, and give you very good photos. But it will not give you what the L lenses can do with the 5D2.

There are a ton of EF lenses in the canon line up, most of them will do a good job with the 5D. But ef-s lenses are only for aps-c camera with the crop sensor. Nikon will accept their DX lenses on the FX bodies, but you need tell the camera to crop the senor input or you will have wacky results. So putting a dx lens on a ff body is kinda restricting the camera, and not letting it do what you buy a ff camera for.

So the question is are you willing to spend the 6000 dollar for a full frame system with the lenses that cover the focal range you are looking at. Because Full Frame is expensive.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2011, 12:44 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Well I do shoot a k-x at time, and it is a fine camera. And with the 55-300 it will have more reach then the 100-400 on a ff body. What is the main reason you want to upgrade. As DA* and the DA limited lenses are very good and they will really add to the image quality that the k-x can capture. Also you are going form a pretty compact system to a massive system if you are going to spend the 6000 for what you are looking for. The 100-400 is a huge lens.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2011, 12:49 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

PS if you do go with FF, it makes little sense to keep the pentax. You will run into having 2 different system. And increase your cost with doubling up the lenses. If you go canon FF, get a canon aps-c body if you want a more compact body at times. That way you can mount all the ef lenses on it, and it will give you 640mm or reach with the 100-400 on a crop body.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2011, 12:58 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Posts: 109
Default

I am prepared to spend the money however I want an end all camera to last me years before I would even think of needing another camera. (don't know if thats possible but I want to try) I want to be able to go out and take the photos I want without being limited by the camera, quality of lens, and the focal ranges of the lenses. I understand that if I upgraded my lenses that the quality would increase and I could increase the focal range but again you have the camera's problems. If I upgrade I want to spend the money on the lenses for the better camera. But you said something that maybe I need to research... Whats the difference between ff and aps-c? what does aps-c mean? I assume that ff stands for full frame....

Also new question, would 2x teleconverter work ok on the 5D2 with the "L" lens?
__________________
Pentax K-x
18-55
55-200
Photoshop CS5
Trihame is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:39 PM.